Did you know that the "feminist-dominated media" have created a
"global gynarchia" in which "vaginocrats" rule the world?

Me neither.

Not until I started writing this column and hitting on topics such as
domestic violence and reproductive choices.

Until then, I always believed that, almost without exception, men run
religions, command the armies, make the laws, preside over the courts, run the
corporations and control the media.

But to hear so-called men's rights groups wah-wah-wah about how "feminazis"
and "feminihilists" are responsible for everything from the breakdown of the
family to violent crime to child abuse to Islamofascism makes me wonder whether
I've been remiss in my observation that men are still in the driver's seat.

Lately, I have become the target of some of these "masculinists" who accuse
me of promoting unequal rights for women, misandry and much worse. Because my
blog Broadsides has software that allows me to track incoming hits, I can see
that I have an increasing number of visitors from such forums as
AmericanWomenSuck.com and StandYourGround.com.

Sites such as these  and believe me, they are legion  are dedicated to
"feminist horror stories" around the "divorce industry" which deprives fathers
of their children and paycheques. Their other issues include the lack of
resources for men who are battered by their wives, false accusations of partner
abuse and rape, and last, but far from least, how men have no choice regarding
what a woman they've impregnated does. They can't stop her from ending the
pregnancy nor can they walk away from 18 years of support payments if she
chooses to go to term.

Now understand that all of these are legitimate concerns, with which I fully
sympathize.

While it's true, for example, that, according to the most recent Statistics
Canada reports, a minority of divorce decisions give sole custody to the mother,
thanks to a huge leap in joint custody awards, that doesn't mean that fathers
get "shared custody," which means the kids live equally with both parents. In
most cases, mothers still control access.

But many men's rights groups take that concern to frightening lengths,
blaming no-fault divorce laws for allowing women dump their husbands while
thrusting their hands firmly in the men's pockets, if you get my double meaning.

All of which ignores that most single mother-headed families live in poverty.
As StatsCan reported in 2007, "Financial difficulties often follow marital
dissolution, particularly for women. In fact, 43 per cent of women who went
through a break-up had a substantial drop in their household income, compared
with 15 per cent of men."

Some bonanza.

These groups also beef that a majority of divorces are initiated by women,
and demand that marriage become an "enforceable contract"  whatever that means.

Interesting, considering how a 2002 study out of the University of Western
Ontario and Queen's University demonstrated that "abuse is the primary factor in
the decision to divorce" What's more, according to the 1993 Canadian Violence
Against Women Survey, 50 per cent of divorced women have been victims of abuse.

Indeed, in 1996, the American Psychological Association reported that men who
beat their wives are twice as likely to go for sole custody and to harass and
intimidate their exes by using the legal system.

So it's easy to conclude that, in many cases, the most vehement of these
men's rights types are angry over losing control over their women.

Which might explain why, as much research shows, post-divorce men suffer
disproportionately from mental health issues such as depression.

That they need counselling and similar services is evident. That's what they
should be lobbying for.

Pure Feminist Propaganda

Wow, the Author must never have attended any Ontario Superior Court Family
Division. The odds of a man getting sole custody in a motion or trial is
entirely remote. Its generally a forgone conclusion that any allegation made by
a woman is fact and a reverse onus applies to a man which is unlikely to be
heard due to "security for costs", "orders striking pleadings" "restraining
orders solely to prevent litigation and or access. Our family courts are corrupt
as a result of heavy feminist pressures and its getting worse every day.

Submitted by
ottawamenscentreat
12:34 PM Wednesday, January 07 2009

Non published Commentary by the Ottawa Men's Centre

The Toronto Star has increasingly "censored" "comments" and in particular now
refuses to post almost any post that is not "politically correct",.

The commentary above

The Toronto
Star takes it upon itself to "delete" phrases , sentences and paragraphs of
"comments" which can "water down" a comment from being obviously critical to "an
observation". The feminist movement have apparently been threatening legal
action and lodging increasing amounts of complaints.

The article above by Antonia Zerbisias is typical of the angry male haters in
our society. Take the word "vaginocrats" or "global gynarchia", Just check
Google and you will see that these words are not really common place, apparently
they are very recent. Antonia Zerbisias article quotes stats that are quite
obviously, pure fiction, the sort of fiction that feminists regularly quote for
causes that result in influencing the judiciary in applying a "Feminist Sharia
Law" or quite simply a "war against me" carried out primarily in Family and
Criminal Court by "Dead Beat Judges" at the request of "dead beat feminist
lawyers" to create a "dead beat dad".

Congrats to Kris Titus and George Piskor for getting this comment below past
the censors, they were extremely lucky to get this much posted. Note,
their comment is posted below and comments censored by the Toronto Star is
highlighted in Yellow!

Below is the comment posted by Kris Titus and George Piskor on January 7,
2009

If the Star is intent on having a serious discussion on divorce, I propose it
first raise its editorial standards beyond superficial and dismissive
caricatures reflected in this article.

To be sure, there are angry men, just as there are angry traumatized women
who are likewise dispossessed of their children in divorce, albeit in smaller
numbers. While claiming to sympathize with the plight of divorced fathers,
Antonia Zerbisias actually paints them as well deserving victims of their
situation as they are supposedly predominantly wife beaters that drive women to
divorce. She uses old data from Statistics Canada since discredited by its own
subsequent studies as a springboard to venture off into non-sequiturs such as
the plight of the poverty of single mothers which she mistakenly equates with
single parents.

The lack of reporting accuracy extends to the classic gender war caricature
of men being anti-feminist whereas a simple member count by gender of feminist
organizations reveals otherwise. Most men, just like most women, subscribe
to the equality feminist school of thought; most men, just like most women,
oppose the gender feminist school of thought based on Marxist principles of
endemic gender warfare requiring societal destruction of both the opposing
gender and the family unit.

The Star has a large segment of the extended divorced community among its
readership. By now, every family in Canada has been touched by unilateral
divorce laws enacted in 1985. Surely its time for a more responsible and
balanced treatment of this subject.